Pages tagged "Topic districts and representation"

Though spared the controversies of congressional redistricting, winner-take-all rules still plague the seven at-large states (Alaska, Delaware, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Vermont, and Wyoming). Nowhere are the shortcomings of our voting system more acute than in at-large winner-take-all races, where one individual is - rather astonishingly - responsible for representing the political and demographic diversity of an entire state. Read our latest critique of winner-take-all elections and our analysis of congressional elections in these at-large states.

For the first time in California's history, a Citizens Redistricting Commission has drawn the lines for congressional districts. Despite having taken control away from partisan state legislators, the commission's map has been controversial, both among racial minority groups and Republicans who are concerned about fair repesentation. Most disticts also will not be competitive.The root of the worst problems associated with redistricting lies with winner-take-all elections, in which 50% + 1 of the vote can elect 100% of the representation. Fair voting systems, relying on a form of proportional representation, are a far better way to achieve public interest objectives and allow all voters to participate in meaningful elections. As part of an ongoing series, FairVote has produced a "super-district" plan designed for elections with a fair voting system. Our California plan upholds U.S. Supreme Court rulings on apportionment while providing fair representation and voter choice for California voters.

Lawmakers in Connecticut are debating how to redraw the boundaries of the state's five U.S. congressional districts in the wake of the 2010 Census. Fully in control of the state legislature, the Democratic Party is expected to push through a new map that protects its incumbents. Such controversies are products of our winner-take-all elections, in which 50.01% of voters can elect 100% of representation. Winner-take-all rules marginalize like-minded voters of a political minority no matter their relative numerical strength, thereby depressing turnout and providing inadequate representation. As part of an ongoing project, FairVote has produced a "super district" map designed for Connecticut elections with a proportional voting system. Our proportional plan upholds U.S. Supreme Court rulings on apportionment while guaranteeing fairer representation.

Lawmakers in Maine are fiercely debating how to redraw the boundaries of the state's two U.S. congressional districts in the wake of the 2010 Census. Both political parties seek new maps favorable to their candidates, a process that could affect not only the current 2-0 Democratic U.S. House majority, but possibly also an Electoral College vote at the presidential level. FairVote has produced an alternative "super district" map designed for election with a proportional voting system. Our plan upholds U.S. Supreme Court rulings on apportionment while guaranteeing competitive voter choice and fairer representation.

Every ten years, after U.S. Census data is released, each state across the country must redraw electoral districts. One state with a history of controversial redistricting plans is Texas. This month, Gov. Rick Perry signed into law the state's new congressional redistricting maps.

Redistricting ensures that political district lines reflect population changes in the U.S. Census every ten years so that each district has the same number of voters per seat in a district. South Carolina is in the midst of redistricting and, as with most states, it’s become complicated and increasingly controversial and partisan. As explained in our recent post on Michigan, FairVote proposes an alternative to the winner-take-all system that has plagued the redistricting process, and opened it up to gerrymandering, partisan bickering, and opportunism.